Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Patna V. The Union of India through its Secretary Income Tax Settlement Commission, Kolkata and Harilal Ventrues Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Amit Mankani

CWJC/2537/2020

AI Insights

The case involves the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Patna, challenging the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission, Kolkata. The petitioner sought to set aside the Commission's order, alleging non-application of mind and insufficient opportunity to contest the assessee's responses to the Rule 9 report. The respondents included the Union of India and M/s Harilal Ventures Pvt. Ltd., among others. The core of the dispute centered on the handling of undisclosed accounts and the adequacy of the inquiry conducted by the Income Tax Department. The Settlement Commission had accepted the voluntary disclosures made by the assessee, which were pivotal in determining the settlement amount.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 800386 (HC-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K N SINGH; AJAY RASTOGI; SMRITI SINGH; KALPANA RASTOGI
• Assessee Lawyers: ARCHANA SINHA; ALOK SHAHI; SWARNA ROY
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Non application of mind; Settlement commission; Unaccounted sales; Voluntary disclosure; Voluntary disclosure

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2537 of 2020 ====================================================== Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Patna through Mr. Suman Ghosh, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2 Patna, aged about 52 years, male, son of Late Krishna Pada Ghosh, Resident of C.R. Building, B.C. Patel Path, Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Union of India through its Secretary Income Tax Settlement Commission, Kolkata having its office at 10C Middleton Street, Kolkata. 2. M/s Harilal Ventrues Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. IV-6, IV-7, Patliputra Industrial Estate, Patliputra, Patna-800013. 3. Shri Amit Mankani, Hari Villa, Near Hospito India, Patna-800001. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Archana Sinha, Advocate Mr. Alok Kumar Shahi, Advocate Ms. Swarna Roy, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Dr. K.N. Singh, ASG Mr. Ajay Kumar Rastogi, Sr. Advocate Mrs. Smriti Singh, Advocate Mrs. Kalpana Rastogi, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 22-03-2024 The impugned order in the writ petition is that of the Settlement Commission. The prayer in the writ petition is to set aside the order of the Settlement Commission for non-application of mind and also for further opportunity to controvert the response made by the assessee/applicant before the Settlement Commission to the Rule 9 report. 2. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Patna High Court CWJC No.2537 of 2020 dt.22-03-2024 2/3 Income Tax Department also claimed that sufficient time was not given to the department to carry out a proper inquiry and that the undisclosed accounts, disclosed at the time of the proceedings before the Settlement Commission were not inquired into. 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the assessee would on the other hand, refer to the order of the Settlement Commission to specifically point out that the undisclosed accounts were not found out on the search and inspection of the department and had been voluntarily submitted before the Settlement Commission, which was reckoned for arriving at the final amount of settlement as per the impugned order. 4. We see from Paragraphs 5.2.8 that the voluntary disclosure of the accounts was made by the applicant and the bank accounts and the transactions therein were reckoned as covered under unaccounted sales which had been accepted by the Tribunal. There is no cause for any further inquiry in the matter. Rule-9 report of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Department was also regarding bogus purchase of milk and khowa and the Patna High Court CWJC No.2537 of 2020 dt.22-03-2024 3/3 Tribunal had found force in the submissions of the department. It was also recorded that the explanation forwarded by the authorized representative of the applicant did not inspire full confidence and he was requested to explain further about the purchase of milk and other items. 5. The further response made by the authorized representative of the applicant on 24.06.2019 was fully extracted in the order. The additional income of Rs. 60 lacs and Rs. 90 lacs added respectively in Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2018-19 was found to be fair and reasonable. 6. We find absolutely no reason to interfere with the order of the Settlement Commission in the writ petition and dismiss the same. P.K.P./- (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) (Harish Kumar, J) AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 27.03.2024 Transmission Date "